Deep Thoughts on Unmanned Marine Vehicles (Part – 1)

One of the most popular abbreviations today is SİDA, Armed Unmanned Marine Vehicle. In this article, we will try to place the SIDA projects being carried out in Turkey in the right place by making a purpose-oriented classification.

Baykar's Global Bayraktar TB2 UCAV Success

Baykar company, which brought great prestige and trust to Turkey in the Defense and Aviation Industry, became especially famous with its Bayraktar TB2 Armed Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Not only in the battlefields in which Turkey was involved, such as Syria and Libya, but also in international battlefields such as Azerbaijan and Ukraine attracted attention; It inevitably affected the defense industry in our country. Although this impact on the defense and aerospace industry is largely positive, it also has negative aspects. One of these negative aspects attracts our attention, especially with the irony it contains.

UCAVs, which effectively prove what impact exponential organizations and disruptive technologies can have on the battlefield; It inspired the search of the classical defense industry of the industrial era to create a new favorite, such as Bayraktar TB2, by preserving its skeletal approaches as much as possible. For this reason, the entire Turkish defense and aviation ecosystem, which operates with a focus on naval forces; He focused on working on the SIDA concept, and many prototype systems that were similar and competing with each other began to emerge.

From a force perspective, there is no harm in having multiple systems that will work anyway. Additionally, operational concepts for the presented and proposed systems can be established over time; Desired revisions and changes can be requested by relying on domestic and national production. For this reason, I must remind you that the process we are experiencing is not shaped by the power center, but by the SSB and its affiliated institutions and industry. My wish is to delve deeply into this subject together and lay down a military-philosophical basis.

Let's Get to Know the Battlefield in Modern Naval Battles

Describing naval battles begins with knowing the terrain on which they took place. The public, who sees the ships sailing on the water surface in all their majesty, is inclined to imagine the naval war as a surface war. However, war takes place in many different dimensions (Multi Domain). We can classify these dimensions as follows.

Dimension 1: Surface Warfare.

This, as perceived by the public, is a form of warfare in which all modern combat capabilities are used by visible warships to eliminate enemy warships. The first misconception that needs to be broken in this dimension is that the war is not a struggle between two ships, but between two combatant fleets consisting of ships with different characteristics. In addition, fighting in seas so vast that they can absorb huge fleets; It is an action whose fate will become clear after the cumulative outcome of multiple battles (whether won or lost) on multiple fronts.

Dimension 2: Submarine.

Submarines are one of the most silent and effective weapons of naval warfare. It is the prestige of a modern navy and the power most feared by its opponents. Submarines operating under the invisibility curtain provided by the seas can exert an influence that can seal the fate of large war fleets.

3rd Dimension: Threats from the sky.

The huge guns of the armored ships of the first world war were replaced by guided missiles. In the Second World War, the air force, as a decisive power, radically affected the navies, and the importance of aircraft carriers emerged. Therefore, the defense structure of combat fleets against airborne threats can be considered more important than other types of threats. With the spread of unmanned technologies, the scope of this threat is expanding further. In addition, today there are variations of elements such as hypersonic missiles and ballistic missiles for anti-ship purposes. For this reason, threats from the air and methods to counter them are becoming increasingly diverse.

4th Dimension: Land-based elements.

Whether it is carried out by a classical artillery or ATGM unit or by a fully-fledged land-based naval defense system, it is not possible to exclude friendly and enemy land elements on the battlefield from the equation in naval warfare.

5th Dimension: Mine warfare.

As a power that still maintains its influence on and under water, mines are elements that naval forces must include in the equation. Mine warfare, which has increased its power and effectiveness thanks to modern technologies, attracts attention with its complex nature that requires even antique systems from the Second World War to be taken seriously.

6th Dimension: Cyberspace.

In the modern battlefield, we cannot ignore the concepts of cyber warfare and electronic warfare. Across ships, fleets, forces and countries; Being able to see, hear, know what is what, distinguish between friend and foe, in short, all matters related to situational awareness are centrally connected to your capabilities in cyberspace. It is known that all capabilities in this field have been rapidly digitalized recently. However, almost all of the past analog methods are kept in reserve. For this reason, it is of great importance to continue the struggle in all analog and digital areas of cyberspace.

7th Dimension: Space.

Although our influence as a country in this dimension is quite limited, the activities of adversary countries in physical space may manifest far beyond our expectations. In addition, the information received from space-based systems and the effects that will arise from the use of this information offer third parties the chance to get involved in the war without being involved in the war itself. For this reason, space is a dimension that must be carefully monitored and evaluated not only for your opponents, but for all elements.

Note: The threats posed by weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, in naval warfare and the modern threats posed by the "Defense Without Casualties" concept; It has been deliberately excluded from the scope of the article.

Lines Appearing on the Naval Battlefield Map

Let's imagine a combat fleet moving on the sea. Let's draw a basic circle where these fleet elements can see with the eye or communicate with light, and within the range of their guns. Let the representation of this circle on the map be our primary sphere of influence defined by physical presence.

As you know, a combat fleet means a force armed for the purpose of war. Their weapons also have a range of effect. Although it may vary due to geographical conditions and sea states, let's imagine this as a second virtual line surrounding the physical borders and add it to our map.

Whether it occurs with the inherent capabilities of a platform included in the combat fleet or with the involvement of a different dimension (air, space, etc.); We also have to evaluate the layers of seeing and knowing. What and when do we come to see? When do we come to know what we see in reality, whether it is virtual or real? We now have three more lines surrounding the physical presence of a fleet.

From the moment we add these virtual lines / layers to the subject, we realize that the battlefield begins to resemble the military maps we remember from land wars. In fact, military art has a very deep-rooted history, gaining all dimensions and layers over time and building on the existing ones. Therefore, we have become more clearly aware of the fronts and conflict lines formed under the management and initiative of our Admirals on our map.

Let's Try to Classify IDAs According to Battle Line and Warfare

IDAs within the Scope of First Class:

Since our military and cultural roots glorify a hero fighting on the battle line, and with Bayraktar TB2, our search for a famous hero has flared up; It would be correct to consider all current SIDA studies only in this context. Yes, anti-submarine warfare etc. We also have IDAs specific to different types of tasks. But in essence, we can see the difference between all these as the difference between infantry soldiers holding infantry rifles, rocket launchers or drum grenade launchers. This example of infantry, all of whom are equipped with pistols and knives as personal weapons, is also useful in revealing the similar aspects of our front-line warriors.

Since our subject is IDAs, it would be useful to evaluate these frontline fighters in two subclasses: infantry and kamikaze. In the Kamikaze class, in the near future; We can expect aileron (flying with ground effect) solutions, howercraft (air cushion) solutions, hydrofoil (underwater wing) solutions and hybrid designs that also include semi-submerged features. Whether it adopts independent or swarm operations, the class into which we will include this force is (unfortunately) the same.

IDAs within the Scope of the Second Class:

There is a second layer, which is quite close to the front line and is slightly less exposed to enemy fire. You can use this layer with 81 mm mortars, OMTAS ATGM, etc. We can describe them as elements that use weapons, provide direct and qualified firepower to the infantry, work as a team and are located just behind the line. In fact, all of these are included in the organizational chart of the unit fighting at the front and are fed by the same logistics and communication channels. An IDA study for this class has not been made public yet.

For example, the South Korean navy has adapted its 130 mm diameter rockets to IIR-guided naval warfare and has developed a multiple-barrelled naval rocket launcher system that can simultaneously engage multiple asymmetrical North Korean boats. You can consider a system similar to this on İDA and included in this class. In the future, with TÜBİTAK SAGE's KUZGUN and Roketsan's ÇAKIR ammunition, this class will be a little easier to derive. However, we should never forget that there will be functional differences between a derived system and a purpose-designed system.

IDAs within the Scope of the Third Class:

An integral element of all armies is special forces. They often infiltrate enemy territory and take up positions before the war begins. They have difficult but very important tasks such as disrupting the enemy's operational style, hindering their logistics, and organizing special sabotages. For this reason, it is necessary to evaluate the WBS reflection of the area in question in two separate subclasses: underwater and surface. Let's try to create operational concepts in this context.

An underwater IDA that can mine the harbor mouth and, if possible, the interior can be considered. A surface UAV can be designed to quickly lay sonobuoys in risky areas and return quickly, forcing enemy submarine elements to act timidly. IDA can be designed to create a fake fleet presence in the air, carrying the deceptive system (my original design) and simulating the enemy in terms of sensors and visuals. (I will also have auxiliary system suggestions.) Underwater UAVs can be designed to ambush in certain selected areas with the light torpedoes they carry. Such examples can be multiplied.

IDA's within the Scope of the Fourth Class:

There is a distinct difference between frontline logistics and general logistics needs. These differences have penetrated into the identity of the tools and methods to be used. In this class we will focus on just one segment of frontline logistics.

There is a concept that those interested in naval forces know but has not been implemented until now: Inventory Ship. These were originally intended as large ships that could be added to fleets to offer very high firepower. They carry a large number of vertical and other types of launchers, providing a large number of guided missiles at the disposal of the fleet's combat ships. They can be described as missile carriers converted from a sort of giant cargo ship.

As İDA, our expectation from this class is not "huge and heavy". Let's build a system that is big enough, fast enough, and dynamic enough. This qualification can be achieved with more than one ATMACA guided missile or AKYA heavy topido. Different loads can be included in the equation over time. In any case, it is clear that this class of IDAs will need to be heavier tonnage and higher capacity than the projects we observe today.

This class may also have reflections on different usage concepts. For example, you can recover from a fleet that suffered losses and retreated with platforms that will continue to fire cheaper and pre-programmed fake ATMACA missiles.

I can multiply class examples and enrich them with subclasses. I can extend the topic further with various unique weapons and usage tactics. However, it would contradict the purpose of this text, which I wrote as an introductory article.

Conclusion

In the battlefield of the future, the concepts of Unmanned / Robotic Systems and Artificial Intelligence will gradually increase in importance. In this context, undoubtedly, investments in the IDA field will not be wasted. However, we see that too many parallel activities are taking place only in a very small part of the potential in the field of IDA. What can be done in this field is actually much broader and more diverse than the activities we are seeing.

We defined naval warfare as a form of warfare that would take place not between two ships, but between at least two combatant fleets. Let's revise the concept of fleet as a system. In fact, we realize that the individuals within the system, where two systems are fighting, are a whole of subsystems. For this reason, we must change our structure regarding IDA, not individually but as a system.

For this reason, I have been writing for a long time about the need for modern combat vehicles (consisting of at least two systems) to be designed as teams. This emphasis is also valid in the field of IDA. For example, the US Air Force is building the air war of the future on four main combat pillars. These are: (Two to be designed separately for the Air and Navy) NGAD (Next Generation Air Dominance) combat manned aircraft. Unmanned combat companion CCA (Collaborative Combat Aircraft) aircraft. Current 4th generation, non-stealth, modernized (F-16, F-15, etc.) warplanes. B-21 Spirit bomber. (In this equation, there are new and exponential usage areas other than bombardment purposes.)

In such a wide area, we focus on a single IDA class and make competitive efforts internally; It is the biggest evidence that we have not been able to get rid of the habits of the industrial age.

However, we live in the age of exponential organizations and disruptive technologies, and we are trying to add a hero of the agricultural and industrial age to this. The market is as wide as the vast seas and pregnant with great opportunities. I believe that relevant institutions and organizations can see this and start making coordinated efforts in line with what they see. Thanks to the emerging ecosystem of subsystem manufacturers in our defense and aerospace industry; I have no doubt that we can coordinate our joint efforts at a faster pace than any other country.